An act of Punishing: The Death Penalty and Criminology (Research Paper Sample)

Death penalty and criminology
Name
Institution
Date
Deterrence in criminology is an act of punishing an individual for committing a criminal offence so that to create fear among the public. This fear in the general public reduces the chances that one of them will commit the same crime. The death penalty is a proper form of deterrence that can be used to reduce capital crimes and provide justice to the guilty and the innocents. Every rational human being or even an animal has fear for death. With the knowledge that certain actions will automatically subject them to a death penalty, they would avoid such actions (Nagin & Pepper, 2012).
A death penalty is the maximum form of punishment for certain criminal offences and is one of the long serving methods for crime prevention. It is the responsibility of the government of any country to protect its citizens from criminal threats. The death penalty is hence a crucial part of deterring those wishing to commit crimes and getting rid of those who have already committed the crimes from the society. It has thus impacted so much in reducing cases of capital crimes in many of the countries that uphold this as the maximum capital punishment for a crime.(Hood & Hoyle, 2014).
Many countries have been able to reduce crime rates in their societies by reducing the number of criminals. It has only been ideal through the imposition of the death penalty in such related crimes. Death being one of the most feared sanctions by people makes it the best weapon to fight crime because no person will want to be a subject of the death penalty. The fear of death by people positively reduces crime by making them adhere to the laws of the land. Execution of criminals creates fear among the people making them avoid actions that are criminal and may lead to death penalty. Capital punishment also reduced the number of crimes in the society and comprehensively reduced crime by directly eliminating them those who have committed the crime.
Another deterrent effect of the death penalty on crime is that it helps to prevent the repetition of criminal offences by previously convicted criminals. That is it ensures the safety of the societies by totally getting rid of the guilty in the crime. If life imprisonment was the maximum penalty for criminal offences, then any prisoner in jail had no reason at all not to commit another crime while at the prison. The death penalty becomes a more fruitful and efficient way to prohibit criminals who have already been convicted to repeat or do any other offence that might lead to further punitive action worse death penalty( Manski & Pepper, 2013) Adopting capital punishment to dangerous criminals ensures that they don’t kill again. The reason being our societies have had several high profile murders who committed crimes after being released from prison for similar offences. Prime examples are the cases of death in Texas in 1966 by Allen McDuff. He was guilty of murdering his girlfriend Edna Louis aged 16, Mark Dunman aged 16 and Robert Brand of 18 years. He was found guilty of the crimes and the court handed him a life imprisonment that by then was serving a minimum of ten years before being paroled. In 1989, he was then discharged and within the first three days of release he had begun killing. He killed Brenda Thompson, Regenia Moore, Sarafina Parker, Melisa Northrup, Colleen Reed and Valencia Joshua. If McDuff initially recieved a death sentence, six lives would have been saved, and the anguish and pain of many families would have been avoided. After his second arrest changes in the law in Texas were experienced this allowed death penalties for certain crimes.The death penalty also brings justice to the innocent and the criminals at large. Justice can only be attained by directly linking the guilty individual with the crime committed by entirely providing evidence that proves the true identity of the person involved in a crime. The use of Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) testing to confirm the guilt or innocence of individuals on death row is one of the many ways that will ensure that the innocent do not face execution. DNA is a unique molecule in a person's body cell that is different from different individuals except in the cases of identical twins. DNA testing can take place in a variety of body samples such as saliva, blood, hair and the skin. The use of DNA testing makes it difficult and virtually impossible to make mistakes in a death penalty. With the advancement of criminal investigations, the judicial system has reduced the chances of errors in proving the innocence or guilt of individuals in criminal offences significantly. If chances of proving innocence or guilt of individuals are high and very reliable, then most of the criminal cases in the society become settled, and the guilty executed in a just and fair way. In that case, if an individual faces a death penalty then it is not the fault of the punishment but the trial itself. (Kelly et al., 2014).
Adoption of the death penalty for criminal offences in a society shows it moral outrage at the offensive act. The value accorded to an individual by that of another in a corporation should be equally the same to him. A society with high moral values will condemn any act that violates the life of any of its members. What if an individual murders another, the best and most fair way of punishing that person is through execution. Execution of a guilty person in a crime is thus the best serving punishment that an ethical society should accord. The society stipulates that if an individual has murdered another, it is unethical for the society from which the two come from to let the murderer walk freely when having an innocent person lying dead. The death penalty may be appealing to many, but again it is essential to an ordered society. It makes the citizens of a country rely on legal procedures in solving problems.
Arguments have risen against the death penalty as being a cruel way of punishment. They argue that any heinous crime must be punishable in agreement with the law, but subjecting a person to death is unconstitutional and illegal. Punishing a criminal by execution is a cruel form of punishment as it is inhuman. It is rational that a person has no right to take away another person’s life even if he has committed a capital crime (Applegate et al., 2013). Human Rights Activists are also against the death penalty as it deprives a person the right to life. Right to life should be a guarantee to every person accordance to most of the state's constitution that guarantees each and every individual the right to life. They propose life imprisonment as being the best way in which an individual who has committed a capital crime should be sentenced of. It is argued that rehabilitation of the killers would change the chances of more killings and is more human and in fact executing a criminal is itself also a murder.
Another argument about the death penalty is a more costly judicial process than lifetime imprisonment without any possibility of parole. Capital crimes tend to take longer periods for a verdict on who is guilty and the sentencing...